I have always scoffed at those (men and women) who have children in their fifties and sixties. And then I watched 70 & Pregnant.
When your state legislature only meets every other year, you apparently work twice as fast at eliminating abortion access all together.
Last month, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued a final ruling in favor of the right to access in vitro fertilization (IVF) in Costa Rica. This is a win for women and Catholics and a blow to the bishops and conservatives who want to deny individuals the right to decide whether and when to have children.
A new study suggests a way to make IVF more successful. But if a “personhood” law ever passed, it would be difficult to do.
A change in a proposed bill in New Hampshire may leave infertile women and couples seeking in-vitro fertilization with few options.
Will they have signs that read “Don’t Create Your Child?”
In general, I have no issue with selective reduction during IVF. But this article even made me pause for a moment.
An empty women’s shelter built by the U.S. military in Kyrgyzstan; three-parent IVF is a possibility; Boehner hires a DOMA attorney; and Donald Trump doesn’t see the relationship between a right to privacy and abortion.
Whose rights are being protected when Catholic hospitals halt second trimester abortions for women who come in with anti-choice activists seeking care?
Women who use IVF at a higher risk for maternal mortality, Rand Paul can’t decide who’s a person, and Rep. Chris Smith’s anti-abortion bill tries to redefine rape.